St George Bank v Hammer (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 953

The defendant applied to have a foreclosure proceeding transferred to Federal Court, but the application for an adjournment was rejected in St. George Bank v Hammer [2015] NSWSC 957. After a transfer under the Financial Sector (Business Transfer and Group Restructure) Act, all the assets and liabilities of St George Bank became assets and liabilities of the Westpac Banking Corporation. In St George Bank v Hammer (No 2) [2015] NSWSC 953 the defendant contended that he “did not sign or make any agreement with Westpac Banking Corporation” regarding the monies owed, and the transfer of the mortgage to the bank was fraudulent. However, as he contends, if he is wrong about everything else, he has fully discharged any indebtedness to the bank by delivering a promissory note for an Australian currency amount on its face of one million dollars. Further, because he had invoked federal legislation, he argued that this court “lacks jurisdiction to hear matters of fact and law concerning matters governed by federal legislation, acts, statues and codes”.

As you can note in 2 and 28, Mark Pytellek was granted leave to appear for the defendant, (who was living in Hawaii at the time) as Mr Pytellek had a power of attorney over the defendant’s affairs in Australia in his absence. It becomes clear at this point where these ideas came from.

Mr Pytellek tendered a Notice to Admit Facts filed and served on 19th March 2015 and the bank’s notice disputing the facts. The “facts” sought to be admitted are a mishmash of the circumstances I have just recounted, and conclusions of mixed fact and law which the borrower sees as the foundation of his case. They do not bear recitation, and in any event, the bank disputed each and all of them.

Click to access st-george-bank-v-hammer-no-2-2015-nswsc-953.pdf